Open reduction and internal fixation of displaced head-split type humeral fractures and role of the rotator-interval approach
- PMID: 37035612
- PMCID: PMC10078818
- DOI: 10.1177/17585732211065449
Open reduction and internal fixation of displaced head-split type humeral fractures and role of the rotator-interval approach
Abstract
Background: Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of humeral head split fractures is challenging because of high instability and limited visibility. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the extend of the approach through the rotator interval (RI) on the reduction quality and functional outcome.
Methods: 37 patients (mean age: 59 ± 16 years,16 female) treated by ORIF through a standard deltopectoral (DP) approach were evaluated. The follow-up period was at least two years. In 17 cases, the approach was extended through the RI. Evaluation was based on radiographs, Constant scores (CS) and DASH scores.
Results: In group DP, "anatomic" reduction was achieved in 9 cases (45%), "acceptable" in 5 cases (25%), and "malreduced" in 6 cases (30%). In group RI, "anatomic" reduction was seen in 12 cases (71%), "acceptable" in 5 cases (29%), and "malreduced" in none (p = 0.04). In the DP group, the CS was 60.2 ± 16.2 and the %CS was 63.9 ± 22.3, while in the RI group, the CS was 74.5 ± 17.4 and the %CS was 79.1 ± 24.1 (p = 0.07, p = 0.08). DASH score was 22.8 ± 19.5 in DP compared to RI: 25.2 ± 20.6 (p = 0.53).
Conclusions: The RI approach improves visualization as it enhances quality of fracture reduction, however functional outcomes may not differ significantly.
Type of study and level of proof: Retrospective, level III.
Keywords: avascular necrosis; constant-score; head-split; humerus fracture; osteosynthesis.
© The Author(s) 2021.
Conflict of interest statement
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Figures
References
-
- Kim SH, Szabo RM, Marder RA. Epidemiology of humerus fractures in the United States: nationwide emergency department sample, 2008. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2012; 64: 407–414. - PubMed
-
- Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, et al.. Update in the epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 442: 87–92. - PubMed
-
- Nho SJ, Brophy RH, Barker JU, et al.. Management of proximal humeral fractures based on current literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 : 44–58. - PubMed
-
- Ockert B, Biermann N, Haasters F, et al.. [Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for primary fracture treatment. Displaced three and four part fractures of the proximal humerus in the elderly patient]. Unfallchirurg 2013; 116: 684–690. - PubMed
-
- Sudkamp N, Bayer J, Hepp P, et al.. Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures with use of the locking proximal humerus plate. Results of a prospective, multicenter, observational study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91: 1320–1328. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials